[FONT=Verdana]Personally I have spent allot of time thinking about this issue although I haven’t really had many conversations about it.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]Discuss.[/FONT]
No. Its a step backward for the movement, I see no advantage. The arguement that we need to decomission for electoral gains is bogus as was proved by the sticks who kept an active and descreet armed wing all throughout their impressive electoral breakthroughs. The only question for me is how the INLA will be structured in the future to prevent unsavoury elements entering as was the example in Dublin. Also and most importantly the role that the INLA will play in the future of the party and the movement. It keeps being looked at as dead weight when it is anything but, it is an asset but only if used correctly. As was the case with the sticks who basically utilised it as a fund raising tool for the party and most importantly as a weapon to use against state repression in certain campaigns. I.E. when a corporation was being picketed by its workers it started ferrying in scabs on buses, the OIRA burned out all these buses. Or when the sticks were occupying vacant housing in Dublin for a housing campaign and the owner of the property forcibly evicted them the OIRA burnt out his business's etc. Its an asset for the movement and should never be looked on as a burden even though with the way it is structured currently and the opporations it conducts it has become a burden to a certain extent. But the answer is not decomissioning its re-organisation. Since reading "The Lost Revolution" it has only reafirmed my analysis of what role an armed wing can play in progressively forwarding our political goals.
[FONT=Verdana]Good post lad and some very valid points I had a similar convo with sol and he expressed the same concerns but always remember that guns and bombs aren’t our only weapon.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]The ruling class does not fear the INLAs guns or bombs they have absorbed the wrath of armed groups for many years and can counter our soon to be out of date arsenal with sophisticated modern weapons selective internment and media attacks.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]Making our ideology relevant to the people turning our membership into community leaders and the establishment of a relevant political movement is the IRSMs main objective.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana]up the erps[/FONT]
But IW, everything you argued there, the INLA doesn't impinge upon that, no1 would disagree with you that guns are our only weapon, far far from it, and no1 would disagree that the establishment of a relevant political movement isn't our most immediate aim etc but again, that is not an argument for the INLA to decommission. You saw my opinions in a doc I sent you, all those points stand IMO. Decommissioning does not stand up to a marxist analysis for me. Even though it may seem like a complex issue, it's a very simple one. Can the INLA forward the overall political aims of our movement, with varying degrees of activity depending on prevailing conditions? The answer is Yes. I fully agree arms should leave the stage right now, but decom should be out of the question. Never mind all the tactical advantages, the threat of loyalist pogroms is always there in areas like Belfast etc so if the INLA throws away its guns the IRSM is in danger of losing its relevancy in the 6 counties. TBH, I haven't heard one good argument for decommissioning, just rhetoric about politics being put first. I usually agree with the points put forward, the fact is they are supposed to be arguing for a decom but they don't really say why that should be the case. A day is a long time in politics, and the IRSM should be prepared for all eventualities. I would argue for reforms, not disbandment or decom, and the guns being silenced for the time being with the fat shed so to speak, retaining both arms and internal structure. The INLA are not just a republican army, they are a socialist army of the working class, and to be honest the idea that the IRSM would leave the state as the only holder of arms at this point is ridiculous. Would Connolly or Costello ever support such action? I really doubt it comrades!
[FONT=Verdana]How can we stop the next Declan Duffy? As it is inevitable that one will emerge due to he nature of our movement at the moment you well know however structured group B is or disciplined it seems or is whilst armed personality cults will emerge people will be exploited the wrong type of people will be attracted to our movement it is a lesson from our history.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]11 years after the INLA ceasefire 11 long years we are no further forward we are no more relevant to the people outside our key demographics than when the army was killing Brits and Loyalists.[/FONT] We might as well be at war. [FONT=Verdana]How can the current leadership justify leaving the legacy and potential for internal conflict to Ian Ross Michael Connor Warren Eoghan Phil etc…[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]Seismic change has to happen within our movement for the people to start taking our social politics at face value.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]I know it may sound like empty rhetoric but we can’t go on forever being perceived by the vast majority of the working class in Ireland as what we are today.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]Building every individual member of this movement in to community leaders whose task it is not only to raise the class consciousness but to be a leader of people is paramount and if an act of decom can go some way to clearing up our image in the eyes of the people well fuck it I will support it.[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]But we will talk more when I see you and Andropov tomorrow night.[/FONT]
